From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932188AbcFURdh (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:33:37 -0400
Received: from mail.eperm.de ([89.247.134.16]:37760 "EHLO mail.eperm.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753099AbcFURdd (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:33:33 -0400
From: Stephan Mueller <smueller@chronox.de>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
        Alexander Kuleshov <kuleshovmail@gmail.com>,
        y2038 Mailman List <y2038@lists.linaro.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [Y2038] [PATCH] crypto: use timespec64 for jent_get_nstime
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 19:07:45 +0200
Message-ID: <2121132.qNHuddqZk8@tauon.atsec.com>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.4.9-300.fc23.x86_64; KDE/4.14.20; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <12040808.ISNuLM4SqW@tauon.atsec.com>
References: <20160617155952.1021006-1-arnd@arndb.de> <CALAqxLXTxM=Rt01_wOpbiYQByVMQ6rO1mazR1BAMRF_uxNHY6A@mail.gmail.com> <12040808.ISNuLM4SqW@tauon.atsec.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Am Dienstag, 21. Juni 2016, 18:51:32 schrieb Stephan Mueller:

Hi,

> > So.. again, I'd avoid using the "fast" accessor unless there is a
> > clear need or obvious benefit. Which should be documented.
> 
> So, you suggest ktime_get_raw_ns? If yes, let me test that for one use case.

I tested ktime_get_raw_ns and it exhibits the same results as 
ktime_get_raw_fast_ns and RDTSC. So, I see no objections in using 
ktime_get_raw_ns.

Ciao
Stephan